Comparison of Two Pancreatic Anastomosis Techniques in terms of Postoperative Complications After Pancreaticoduodenectomy.
Journal
The Eurasian journal of medicine
ISSN: 1308-8734
Titre abrégé: Eurasian J Med
Pays: Turkey
ID NLM: 101557701
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2021
Oct 2021
Historique:
entrez:
3
2
2022
pubmed:
4
2
2022
medline:
4
2
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
In this retrospective study, we compared the postoperative complications by using both the Clavien-Dindo classification and the Revised 2016 International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) classification methods after pancreaticoduodenectomy. The data of patients were retrospectively reviewed. Pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) and pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) were performed on 41 and 40 patients, respectively. The patients were assigned into two groups for anastomosis types and compared with each other according to postoperative complications. The postoperative follow-up period of the patients was limited to 90 days. No significant difference was detected between the two groups in terms of gender (P = .581) and age (P = .809). According to the Clavien-Dindo classification system, grade 1 complication rates were 29.3% and 35.0% in PJ and PG groups, respectively. Also, grade 2 complication rates were 34.1% and 32.5% in PJ and PG groups, respectively. Besides, grade 3B complication rates were 9.8% and 17.5% in PJ and PG groups, respectively. No grade 3A, grade 4A, and grade 4B complications were detected in both groups. But, grade 5 complications rates were 2.4% and 5.0% in PJ and PG groups, respectively. Based on the ISGPS classification system, the pancreatic fistulas were classified. The biochemical leak rates were calculated as 26.8% and 37.5% in PJ and PG groups, respectively. The rates were 14.6% and 10% in PJ and PG groups, respectively, for grade B complications. Also, grade C complication rates were 9.75% and 12.5% in PJ and PG groups, respectively. No statistically significant differences were detected between the two groups for postoperative complications. The evidence from this retrospective study suggests that there is no difference between the two types of pancreatic anastomosis techniques (PJ or PG) in terms of the rate of postoperative complications.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35110095
doi: 10.5152/eurasianjmed.2021.20194
pmc: PMC9879224
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
192-196Références
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2007 May;33(4):488-92
pubmed: 17145159
Arch Surg. 2004 Mar;139(3):327-35
pubmed: 15006893
Int Surg. 2015 Feb;100(2):275-80
pubmed: 25692430
World J Gastrointest Surg. 2017 Dec 27;9(12):270-280
pubmed: 29359033
Ann Surg. 2011 Aug;254(2):385-6; author reply 386
pubmed: 21677560
Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2012;2012:627095
pubmed: 22474444
Lancet Oncol. 2013 Jun;14(7):655-62
pubmed: 23643139
World J Surg. 2019 Dec;43(12):3128-3137
pubmed: 31502003
Ann Surg. 2007 Mar;245(3):443-51
pubmed: 17435552
Br J Surg. 2006 Aug;93(8):929-36
pubmed: 16845693
HPB (Oxford). 2005;7(2):99-108
pubmed: 18333171
World J Gastroenterol. 2019 Jul 28;25(28):3722-3737
pubmed: 31391768
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2016 Jun;401(4):427-37
pubmed: 27102322
Arq Bras Cir Dig. 2013 Jul-Sep;26(3):213-8
pubmed: 24190380
Ann Surg. 2004 Aug;240(2):205-13
pubmed: 15273542
Ann Surg. 2005 Dec;242(6):767-71, discussion 771-3
pubmed: 16327486
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2019 Aug;1450(1):15-31
pubmed: 31008520
Ann Surg. 2000 Sep;232(3):419-29
pubmed: 10973392
HPB (Oxford). 2011 Oct;13(10):723-31
pubmed: 21929673
Int J Surg Oncol. 2017;2017:7526494
pubmed: 28798875
Br J Surg. 2002 Oct;89(10):1245-51
pubmed: 12296891